PDA

View Full Version : Special Election


TMC
11-09-2005, 9:22 AM
The people in this state are NUTS!, we thrown out a gov. because we need change, so the new gov. proposes change and the same people say no.

Soooo, we don't like the way the state is going, but lets not change anything!

PressCheck
11-09-2005, 9:33 AM
Total Bull*****. EVERYTHING I voted for failed. I keep getting closer & closer to leaving the PRK.

shecky
11-09-2005, 9:37 AM
The people in this state are NUTS!, we thrown out a gov. because we need change, so the new gov. proposes change and the same people say no.

Soooo, we don't like the way the state is going, but lets not change anything!


Wrong. People voted for Arnold because they were starstruck and Davis had the personality of a cardboard box. Voters here are just as shallow and flighty as anywhere else.

MaxQ
11-09-2005, 9:50 AM
Agreed, most of the people are nuts.

But, Arnold and his handlers made a newbie political mistake. He wanted a feather in his cap for the next gubernatorial election. If Props 74-77 passed, he'd be a shoe in.

Unfortunately for us, he didn't realize that the voters hadn't really changed. Enough people wanted Davis out, so he got in. The recall wasn't a vote as much for Arnold, as against Davis.

So he calls a special election and spreads his support thinly between 4 major propositions. And then he pisses off the unions, teachers, libs, etc., and has his opponents spend $80 million on ads. Well, that's just begging for a lesson in humility.

shecky
11-09-2005, 10:32 AM
Agreed, most of the people are nuts.

But, Arnold and his handlers made a newbie political mistake. He wanted a feather in his cap for the next gubernatorial election. If Props 74-77 passed, he'd be a shoe in.

Unfortunately for us, he didn't realize that the voters hadn't really changed. Enough people wanted Davis out, so he got in. The recall wasn't a vote as much for Arnold, as against Davis.

Maybe I'll give voters more credit than I did earlier. Despite disappointment with Davis, the recall effort (largely spearheaded by Darryl Isa with his eye on the governor's seat himself) didn't have wings until a movie star weighed in on the issue. There was a sense that he was not going to be like a politician, perhaps a (unrealistic) notion that captured the imagination.

Turns out he would act exactly like another politician. A politician who bought all his own election bull**** and whose mandate bought more hubris than clout. So he dispensed with coalition building and went on to piss off everyone while displaying a kind of monarchy complex. On the upside, maybe he's learned a lesson by this little comeuppance. From which we can all benefit.

TMC
11-09-2005, 2:22 PM
Arnold may has is faults but really, the people voted to spend more money than the state takes in, that it's ok for a minor to have an abortion without the parents knowing, that teachers only need 2 years the then they can't be fired, that politicians can draw thier own districts! These props had nothing to do with Arnold but too many air head people didn't read the measures they just voted based on a 30 second ad bashing him. They took the easy way out and said "I don't know what I'm voting on so I'll vote no".

The liberals in this state have been complaining about the federal deficite but then say its ok for the state to run one.

California spends 53% of its budget on schools and kids aren't getting smarter and the teachers union says they need more money.

I'd love to have only worked for 2 years and then I can't get fired, wouldn't we all. Unfortunately I work in the real world like most of us.

There is truly no common sense left in in this state.

Placebo
11-09-2005, 3:44 PM
I'd love to have only worked for 2 years and then I can't get fired, wouldn't we all. Unfortunately I work in the real world like most of us.

So too would teachers love that, but since that's not how it works, in spite of the misleading campaigns boasting the goodness of prop. 74, it's just not true.

There is no such thing as teacher "tenure" (meaning: a permanent "job for life") in California. This is a myth.

soopafly
11-09-2005, 5:02 PM
TMC,

You seem to be misinformed on what tenure for public school teachers is. All tenure guarantees for teachers is that they cannot be arbitrarily fired. There is a due process, with review board, where they decide wether or not there are justifiable reasons to terminate a teacher's employment. Without tenure, a teacher can be let go with just two bad reviews(when the principal comes in for an hour or two and observes the class), even if the teacher has had a flawless record for over 5, 10, 20 or more years. A teacher IS NOT GUARANTEED A JOB FOR LIFE and CAN STILL BE FIRED if the review board decides so.

I'm wondering, do you know any teachers personally? I'm not bashing, this is a serious question because I think if you had a better understanding of how the public education system works and what teachers have to go through, a clearer picture would be painted for you. I used to have certain pre-concieved notions about teachers and education, but now I know better.

TMC
11-09-2005, 7:11 PM
TMC,

You seem to be misinformed on what tenure for public school teachers is. All tenure guarantees for teachers is that they cannot be arbitrarily fired. There is a due process, with review board, where they decide wether or not there are justifiable reasons to terminate a teacher's employment. Without tenure, a teacher can be let go with just two bad reviews(when the principal comes in for an hour or two and observes the class), even if the teacher has had a flawless record for over 5, 10, 20 or more years. A teacher IS NOT GUARANTEED A JOB FOR LIFE and CAN STILL BE FIRED if the review board decides so.



I'm not trying to start a fight, I admit I don't know much about the public education system. My wife and I have met several times with the teachers, faculty and principle at high school my daughter has attended over last 1.5 years. We know how to contact them directly, know what assignments my daugher is doing week to week and who to talk to when things seem out of place. That and my stay in school 23 years ago.

The only teachers I know well are the ones at the private school my youngest attends, so I guess I live in a bubble.

Most people who work for a large company can be fired for a few bad reviews and they only make some product, a teacher is one of the most important jobs in the country. How many kids can a bad teacher screw up before something is done? I have nothing against teachers but they are there for the kids, not the other way around.

When politicians and union folks fight against things that do work like vouchers and charter schools they say things like “we can’t do that we need to put more money in the public schools” well, the public schools are failing and failing the kids, how many kids are going to get a sub-standard education while they are “fixing the problem” They've been trying to fix the problem for 30+ years! How many kids is that?

On the lack of money for schools this is what I know, the cost per student for public education is reportedly around $10,000. I pay $4,230 per year for my youngest to attend a mixed 3rd and 4th grade class with 13 student total in a 5 year old facility. It seems to me the private sector does much better with its money

Just my opinion.

SteveSatch
11-09-2005, 8:37 PM
deleted-previous posts answered what "tenure" is

SteveSatch
11-09-2005, 8:41 PM
Ca is 42nd in the nation as far as money spent per student on education. That's not low enough for you?

Charliegone
11-09-2005, 9:28 PM
Well, yes that is true but the teachers in California get paid the most. Not to mention the superintendents, aids etc.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2005/06/10/EDGDLD5MH81.DTL


website:

http://www.ed-data.k12.ca.us/Navigation/fsTwoPanel.asp?bottom=%2Fprofile%2Easp%3Flevel%3D0 4%26reportNumber%3D16

this is the amount of teachers in California: mixed

332,007 x lets say a 56,000 average salary=18,592,392,000=18billion just for the teachers (who are the highest paid in the US)

http://www.edsource.org/pdf/TeachersCompFinal.pdf

this is an older 2002 salary data. Of course, in the last 3 years their salaries have increased. California spends 50 billion on education. So that means 50-18=32 billion left. And those are JUST teachers. Superintendents get paid at least 150,000 thousand a year average. That takes about a couple million, not to mention the other administration...well lets just say money is spent more on everything else than the students...obviously there is something wrong with that.
AND no Ahnold has not decreased funding to schools, in fact he increased it last year by 2billion! So I don't know what this bs is about him taking away "2 billion" from education. Even if he did, he put it back. Fact is: Californians in this special election showed they would rather be in debt and are also short sighted. Thats my view at least..

Stevil
11-09-2005, 9:40 PM
The latest figures show CA elementary spending per pupil was 26th at $7,691 per pupil, the National average is $8,019. Lowest State being Utah at $4,860 and the highest being DC at $13,328 and a real State New Jersey at $12,202... of those guess which State's pupils get the best results? ;)

Clodbuster
11-09-2005, 9:45 PM
Obiviously. Your vote doesn't count. That's what prop 77 was suppose to fix. :eek:

Heard that in certain "areas", some electronic voting machines didn't work properly, so voting was done the old fashioned way...by ballot box. Wonder how many of these will be found floating in the Bay after a week.

Clod

Total Bull*****. EVERYTHING I voted for failed. I keep getting closer & closer to leaving the PRK.

TMC
11-09-2005, 9:45 PM
In political speak a "budget cut" is when you get more that last year but not as much as you wanted.

Bush let Ted Kennedy write the education bill and they still complain that Bush is cutting education spending.

MaryJo was unavailable for comment.

Charliegone
11-09-2005, 11:36 PM
Well, you might have a point, but who is not doing anything? Our legislature is controlled by the Democrats. They haven't really contributed any ideas on solving the defecit problem, instead all I have heard is they hate Ahnold.

My father works for a unified school district. He tells me that most of the computers that they buy are thrown out into the trash the next year? Why does a school need a new computer every year? Wouldn't it be wiser to use it longer? Some things in education are being mispent. Also what about the other teachers that live in other parts of the US who also pay high rents, gas, and taxes? Contributing to education is a good idea, but it can't go unchecked. Also you are right, too much buraeucracy brought to us by the people in Sacramento.:mad:

SteveSatch
11-09-2005, 11:45 PM
The latest figures show CA elementary spending per pupil was 26th at $7,691 per pupil, the National average is $8,019. Lowest State being Utah at $4,860 and the highest being DC at $13,328 and a real State New Jersey at $12,202... of those guess which State's pupils get the best results? ;)


In "What We Really Spend on Education" (June 10), political commentator Jill Stewart says "ignorant voters" should stop insisting that California spend more money on public schools. Citing fresh data from the National Center for Education Statistics, she reports that California spent $7, 552 per student in 2002-03, placing 26th among all states and just $22 shy of the national median. "We do not 'underfund' our schools," Stewart asserted. "Why doesn't everyone know this?"

The answer is simple: Because it isn't true.

With a ballot measure this fall proposing to amend the state constitution to reduce the minimum funding guarantee for public schools, voters deserve to know how our education spending stacks up against other states. But Stewart's use of the data does not offer a fair comparison.

To begin with, education costs more to provide in California than elsewhere. This should come as no surprise, given our high cost of living. Teachers are the most important determinant of school quality; on average, it costs more to hire good teachers in California, because it costs more for teachers to live here.

To equalize the purchasing power of education dollars from state to state, the NCES has developed an index that estimates geographic differences in education costs. If you were to adjust raw spending data with this cost index (as I did), the result shows that California's per-pupil spending in 2002-03 ranked 42nd in the nation, not 26th.

But even this is an imperfect comparison. True to its heritage as a land of opportunity, California has a higher percentage of poor children and English-language learners than other states. These children often lack the educational advantages of children from middle-class, English-speaking families. On average, this means that an education dollar will buy higher achievement in other states than in California, because the same dollar must be stretched further in California to meet the special needs of our diverse student body.

Let us assume (very conservatively) that each poor child or English learner needs 20 percent more resources than the average child in order to reach the same level of achievement. When this additional factor is taken into account, California's education spending ranked 45th in the nation in 2002-03, just above Mississippi's.

To put this grim reality in further perspective, the NCES has published 2000-01 data on the per-pupil expenditure of school districts at the 10th, 50th and 90th percentile of spending in each state. When adjusted for regional cost differences and student demographics, these data show that 90 percent of districts in 37 states spent more than the median district in California. Moreover, low spending in California is not confined to a few highly populous districts: 90 percent of California districts spent less than the median district in 14 other states, and nearly 90 percent of districts in New Jersey, New York and Wyoming outspent all but the top 10 percent of districts in California.

Although researchers continue to debate the relationship between money and outcomes, it hardly seems coincidental that California's student achievement, like its real per-pupil spending, trails almost every other state. A recent report by the nonpartisan think tank RAND found that the average math and reading performance of California students from 1990 to 2003 on the widely respected National Assessment of Educational Progress ranked 48th in the nation, just below New Mexico and Alabama and just above Louisiana and Mississippi -- all low-spending states. Meanwhile, high-spending states such as Wisconsin and Massachusetts dominated the top ranks -- where California used to be 30 years ago.

Our state's changing demographics do not fully explain its weak performance. California students of every major racial group, including whites, perform worse than their counterparts in the rest of the nation. Furthermore, RAND found that "Black, Hispanic, and non-Hispanic white students in California are among the lowest-scoring students in the nation when compared to students in other states who have similar family characteristics." These facts support what common sense suggests: In education, as in life, you get what you pay for.

The irony is that California has long been a leader in setting high academic standards to guide curriculum and instruction. In two studies released this year, the Thomas B. Fordham Foundation in Washington ranked California's standards among the very best in the nation. Our English-language arts standards, it said, are "balanced and comprehensive," and our math standards "come as close to perfection as any set of mathematics standards in the country." No other state exhibits such an enormous gap between its expectations and its performance in K-12 education.

In order to bridge this gap, we need a host of reforms to make schools more accountable, more efficient and more competitive. But we also need to follow a simple principle in funding our schools: Our education budget must be based on what it actually costs to enable all children to learn to high standards, not on annual political conflict and compromise. In such states as Kansas, Kentucky and New York, where lawsuits have successfully challenged inadequate school funding, courts have ordered legislatures to put this basic principle into practice, and a valuable research base is emerging on how to estimate the real cost of a high-quality education.

In April, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger took a step toward elevating public schools above politics by convening an Advisory Committee on Education Excellence, led by respected educator and former Occidental College President Ted Mitchell. In setting its priorities, the governor asked the committee to study the adequacy of education funding in order "to make California's schools the best in the nation once again." But the governor has sent a mixed signal by supporting a measure in this fall's special election that seeks to limit the minimum-funding guarantee for public schools. It would be remarkable if his advisory committee did not confirm what many voters already know: California cannot have the best schools in the nation so long as our education funding is among the worst.

Ericthenorse
11-10-2005, 1:48 AM
This is not what I come to this sight for, but DAMN this is some good stuff... I wish more people could see what us "ignorant gun nuts" talk about:rolleyes:

ldivinag
11-10-2005, 2:07 AM
There is no such thing as teacher "tenure" (meaning: a permanent "job for life") in California. This is a myth.


once you hit college, there is such a thing called tenure.

at first, i used to joke that you cant get fired unless you are arrested. when i read a story of a CAL STATE prof who went to jail and was released, this person went back to teaching.

now, i talked to a high ranking faculty member and asked about being fired.

only when a bunch of commitees find them incompetent to teach, can a tenured faculty be fired... and this is really rare. usually, the options of early retirement, etc are taken instead.

colossians323
11-10-2005, 5:42 AM
In "What We Really Spend on Education" (June 10), political commentator Jill Stewart says "ignorant voters" should stop insisting that California spend more money on public schools. Citing fresh data from the National Center for Education Statistics, she reports that California spent $7, 552 per student in 2002-03, placing 26th among all states and just $22 shy of the national median. "We do not 'underfund' our schools," Stewart asserted. "Why doesn't everyone know this?"

The answer is simple: Because it isn't true.

With a ballot measure this fall proposing to amend the state constitution to reduce the minimum funding guarantee for public schools, voters deserve to know how our education spending stacks up against other states. But Stewart's use of the data does not offer a fair comparison. [QUOTE]

Actually Mr. Satch, you are being a little misleading here.
The numbers that are being thrown around are all low.
The correct way to find out what the per pupil spending is, is to take the California school budget, plus the added federal dollars, and divide them by the number of pupils in the Californian future socialists training camps.
Which puts the per pupil spending alot closer to 10,000 dollars per pupil in
California.
[QUOTE]
To begin with, education costs more to provide in California than elsewhere. This should come as no surprise, given our high cost of living. Teachers are the most important determinant of school quality; on average, it costs more to hire good teachers in California, because it costs more for teachers to live here.

To equalize the purchasing power of education dollars from state to state, the NCES has developed an index that estimates geographic differences in education costs. If you were to adjust raw spending data with this cost index (as I did), the result shows that California's per-pupil spending in 2002-03 ranked 42nd in the nation, not 26th.



More hocus posus here.
Where did they come up with such absurd nonsense, the dollar has to be stretched more with poor people. Heck, they don't stretch the dollar at all in the hood, you guys just collect your checks, and neglect the inner city.
Where do ou come up with such dribble?
Never mind, I'm sure the unioins have rotted your mind with this garbage, and you are just following orders from your BIG government union.

To put this grim reality in further perspective, the NCES has published 2000-01 data on the per-pupil expenditure of school districts at the 10th, 50th and 90th percentile of spending in each state. When adjusted for regional cost differences and student demographics, these data show that 90 percent of districts in 37 states spent more than the median district in California. Moreover, low spending in California is not confined to a few highly populous districts: 90 percent of California districts spent less than the median district in 14 other states, and nearly 90 percent of districts in New Jersey, New York and Wyoming outspent all but the top 10 percent of districts in California.

Although researchers continue to debate the relationship between money and outcomes, it hardly seems coincidental that California's student achievement, like its real per-pupil spending, trails almost every other state. A recent report by the nonpartisan think tank RAND found that the average math and reading performance of California students from 1990 to 2003 on the widely respected National Assessment of Educational Progress ranked 48th in the nation, just below New Mexico and Alabama and just above Louisiana and Mississippi -- all low-spending states. Meanwhile, high-spending states such as Wisconsin and Massachusetts dominated the top ranks -- where California used to be 30 years ago.

You also neglect to mention how 65% of all freshmen entering the UC system have to take remedial math, and english because of the great job that our public education system is doing. Yeah, more money will help the teachers teach better. lol
This is taken from a study in 2002 done by the Pacific Research Institute, which also states, that these tests that determine their placment lowered their standards in 2000.
More money, more money. How about learning to educate, rather then indoctrinate our youth.


Our state's changing demographics do not fully explain its weak performance. California students of every major racial group, including whites, perform worse than their counterparts in the rest of the nation. Furthermore, RAND found that "Black, Hispanic, and non-Hispanic white students in California are among the lowest-scoring students in the nation when compared to students in other states who have similar family characteristics." These facts support what common sense suggests: In education, as in life, you get what you pay for.

At over 10,000 dolars per pupil, shouldn't we expect more?


The irony is that California has long been a leader in setting high academic standards to guide curriculum and instruction. In two studies released this year, the Thomas B. Fordham Foundation in Washington ranked California's standards among the very best in the nation. Our English-language arts standards, it said, are "balanced and comprehensive," and our math standards "come as close to perfection as any set of mathematics standards in the country." No other state exhibits such an enormous gap between its expectations and its performance in K-12 education.

The standards keep on getting lowere and lower in Caifornia, it is no secret why our kids are suffering.
When Diversity turns into perversity, and this is being taght as the norm, we wonder why there is poor performance.
New math, "its not the right answer we are worried about, its how you got there." more feeel good crap
Group grades? When my son was in high school several years back, 35% of his grade was based on group thought, in Fremont.
Once again, indoctrination is not education.


In order to bridge this gap, we need a host of reforms to make schools more accountable, more efficient and more competitive. But we also need to follow a simple principle in funding our schools: Our education budget must be based on what it actually costs to enable all children to learn to high standards, not on annual political conflict and compromise. In such states as Kansas, Kentucky and New York, where lawsuits have successfully challenged inadequate school funding, courts have ordered legislatures to put this basic principle into practice, and a valuable research base is emerging on how to estimate the real cost of a high-quality education.

It makes me laugh that teachers getting paid 60,000 dollars for a little less then 8 months of work think that they are not paid enough.
Then blame the system for not enough money, this is why are kids are failing in education.
Money has nothing to so with education, parent involvment, and accountable teachers have everything to do with education.
After my bad experience with my 23 year old, in the government training camps, I vowed never to stick another of my kids in such a waste of time, and money system.
I pay six hundred dollars a year, for curriculum, and that is it.
I have four kids being home schooled currently, and all are at least one grade higher or more in skill level in every subject.
I guess I'll see what 600.00 dollars a year brings me (thats 150.00 per student) versus the governments over 10,000 dollars a year.
Maybe I should be screaming for more money to improve my childrens education.
My kids go on field trips, they are usually done with school by lunch, they don't spend all night doning homework, and yet they are performing better then their counterparts in the public system.
No, once again, it is not money, it is parents, and teachers that care.


In April, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger took a step toward elevating public schools above politics by convening an Advisory Committee on Education Excellence, led by respected educator and former Occidental College President Ted Mitchell. In setting its priorities, the governor asked the committee to study the adequacy of education funding in order "to make California's schools the best in the nation once again." But the governor has sent a mixed signal by supporting a measure in this fall's special election that seeks to limit the minimum-funding guarantee for public schools. It would be remarkable if his advisory committee did not confirm what many voters already know: California cannot have the best schools in the nation so long as our education funding is among the worst.

Actually, california will never have the best schools as long as the CTA, and NEA are involved. They have lowered the standards in education, and turned it into pure indoctrination, and are stupifying are kids.
Money isn't going to fix a broken system, it will only change, when people have a will.
Obviously this time around the people voted for continuing down the sorry shameful path that our public education system is, as they just want the status quo.
California is in the top ten, when it comes to funding per student (take the budget divided by students, do the math) and continues to slide downhill in performance. Without reform, expect nothing to change.

Charliegone
11-10-2005, 5:40 PM
Hmm forgot about the fed money..thanks for clearing that up.:D

Stevil
11-10-2005, 10:44 PM
Stevesach I'd have to disagree with some of your assumptions and fuzzymath.

Utah: $4,860 (lowest spending) per elementary pupil results in an education level ranking of 26th overall.

California: $7,691 (just below median spending) per elementary pupil results in an education level ranking of 46th overall.

AND I cannot understand how my son in a Californian Private School for which I pay less than $4,500 can attain the education level of 1st overall in comparison to the country... surely it would make sense to pull all the kids outta' the Cali Public Schools and put them in schools modelled after my sons school... we'd save money and get better results, right Stevesach?

PanzerAce
11-10-2005, 11:13 PM
colossians, some very good points. I thank whatever is out there every day that I managed to stay out of the public school system untill I was in HS. As for standards, I guess we will just have to take up that cause once we get RKBA wont we?

blacklisted
11-10-2005, 11:28 PM
I think that education is only as good as you make it. I saw plently of people that had all the opportunity in the world, but they REFUSED to even look at a book, citing such reasons as "books are gay" and "only ***s read" (sorry if this offends anyone, I'm just trying to provide an honest example). This is no joke, and it was very widespread in the public schools I went to. Most of these kids were in to the so called "gangsta" lifestyle as well. And where I went to school, this was probably around 20 percent of the school. I actually got strange looks when I was seen read a book outside of class.

My high school had to force kids to read, they called it "pleasure reading". There was a 20 minute period where everyone had to read a book. Still, there were plenty of kids with hip-hop magazines, and plenty more who just stared blankly at the wall. Anyone who tried to ditch this and got caught would have to complete their reading in the office.

If you look at the education in some countries we would consider "third-world", their improvised schools are actually better than some of ours!

Sorry if this is inflammatory in any way. I had a very tough time with the public school system, and finally got out of high school a year early by taking a test. I just couldn't stand it. I actually felt phsyically ill when I went to school. The public college I go to isn't much better, but I wont get in to that.

PanzerAce
11-10-2005, 11:34 PM
Another good point black. I also used to get weird looks when people asked what I was going to do during my free periods and I told them I had a book in my pack. What did you read in school for the fun of it? I was more into SciFi stuff (Though I did read War and Peace, 3 times, most boring book in the world I thought).

But yah, the education you get is only as good as you want it to be/make it. and unfortunatly, those who dont make anything out of their education tend to just feed the same kind of kids back into the system, while those who did make their education worth it tend to get their kids into better private schools.

shecky
11-10-2005, 11:51 PM
But yah, the education you get is only as good as you want it to be/make it.

This has been my experience. In CA, a GREAT education is there to be had for the taking, from kindergarten to university. The student just has to be motivated enough to take it.

Teachers love teaching enthusiastic students. Realistically, why waste too much effort on a kid that doesn't give a crap if it takes away time and resources from the more motivated students?

Inoxmark
11-11-2005, 12:00 AM
I also would like to see SteveSatch to comment TMC's and Stevil's claims that spending 4-4.5K on private school buys much better education. Let's not forget that these posters still pay taxes that finance public schools. What happened to that voucher idea?

blacklisted
11-11-2005, 12:09 AM
Another good point black. I also used to get weird looks when people asked what I was going to do during my free periods and I told them I had a book in my pack. What did you read in school for the fun of it? I was more into SciFi stuff (Though I did read War and Peace, 3 times, most boring book in the world I thought).

But yah, the education you get is only as good as you want it to be/make it. and unfortunatly, those who dont make anything out of their education tend to just feed the same kind of kids back into the system, while those who did make their education worth it tend to get their kids into better private schools.

I read everything from modern fiction such as Stephen King (I love the Dark Tower series) to Greek drama. Anything to keep my mind busy. Sometimes, people asked me if my books had any pictures. I also got strange looks from teachers sometimes. One year, my reading period was before PE, I finished my book in class (it was a thick one, probably 800 pages, and I had been reading it for the past week or so). The teacher noticed I wasn't doing anything, and he started to bother me. I told him I finished reading, and he didn't believe me (I guess the book was too thick). He then tried to get me to take one of the books from the box they had for kids who didn't bring any. I don't remember any specifics, but there was some really silly junk in there. I refused, and got in trouble. This was while people were "reading" SPORTS ILLUSTRATED! That's one of the things that REALLY made me want to leave school.

However. it wasn't all negative. I was able to "liberate" many books from the racks and add them to my private collection. All the classes had book racks with books that they could read but never did. I got some good sci-fi books from these.

PanzerAce
11-11-2005, 12:23 AM
yah, I had a similar experience. But once my lit teacher saw the book I had just finished (War and Peace), she decided that I could do whatever I wanted during the reading period. IIRC, I was one of about 3 people who got more than a 95% overall in her class. Never really could get into Stephen King though. I always thought that Koontz was a better writer. You ever read anything by Neil Gaiman? Some pretty wierd stuff in there. Weird, but good.

Stevil
11-11-2005, 12:34 AM
Before we pulled my son outta' the local Public School disaster, the School District decided to close all the School Libraries instead of axing the School Band Program to save money (they had to ditch one or the other). :rolleyes: I mean come on, who needs books and Libraries when you got a cool hip-hop School drum line.

blacklisted
11-11-2005, 12:36 AM
yah, I had a similar experience. But once my lit teacher saw the book I had just finished (War and Peace), she decided that I could do whatever I wanted during the reading period. IIRC, I was one of about 3 people who got more than a 95% overall in her class. Never really could get into Stephen King though. I always thought that Koontz was a better writer. You ever read anything by Neil Gaiman? Some pretty wierd stuff in there. Weird, but good.

I agree that Koontz is a better author. But I'm not picky. One of the weirdest books I have read would have to be Neuromancer.

I got an F in every high school english class I took. English 1 Pre-IB, English 2 CP, and Mythology CP. I failed English 2 because I refused to read "I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings" by Maya Angelou. That book was vile, and I refused to read it. I got an A on each essay that I did though. My high school years were truly strange. I just finished taking English 101A and 101B in "college" and got an A and B, respectively. No more English for me, EVER :) :D !

This is a bit off topic, but so is this entire post. My friend is taking English 101A at the same school I go to, and last week an entire class consisted of watching PETA propaganda videos (the ones where they slaughter animals and then say "don't eat meat" or something). In one of them, some PETA members "rescued" 30 chickens from the slaughterhouse. Then, they watched "Supersize Me". The teacher said that she thought they should be informed. That's college for you.

blacklisted
11-11-2005, 12:40 AM
Before we pulled my son outta' the local Public School disaster, the School District decided to close all the School Libraries instead of axing the School Band Program to save money (they had to ditch one or the other). :rolleyes: I mean come on, who needs books and Libraries when you got a cool hip-hop School drum line.

How's this one for stupidity?

My school had TERRIBLE test scores. They were having trouble getting kids to read, as I said. They responded by cutting library staff and funding each year (never went there myself, because the librarian was sadistic ;) )

Anyway, they build a new gym that cost 10s of millions of dollars. The sad thing is, we already had a great gym.

We also had a band, but they SUCKED as far as I know, and had no marching band.

The kids were getting dumber, but the PE teachers sure were happy.

PanzerAce
11-11-2005, 12:58 AM
Neuromancer was pretty good, but the rest of the books in that 'universe' were marginal in my opinion. If you liked that though, you probaly would get a kick out of Snow Crash. Or maybe Cryptonomicon....

Oh, and believe me, Gaiman is WAY wierder than Neuro. At the start of American Gods I was saying to myself: "Ok, This is wierd, not the wierdest, but wierd", but by the middle of the book it was more like "Whaaaaa???"

Hmm, Wasteland of Flint was also wierd. Not as wierd as the others mentioned above, but still very good.

Oh, and since it seems that the original topic is no longer being talked about really, I feel I should post this:

http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b24/PanzerAce/Thread_Has_Been_Hijacked.jpg

blacklisted
11-11-2005, 1:26 AM
Neuromancer was pretty good, but the rest of the books in that 'universe' were marginal in my opinion. If you liked that though, you probaly would get a kick out of Snow Crash. Or maybe Cryptonomicon....

Oh, and believe me, Gaiman is WAY wierder than Neuro. At the start of American Gods I was saying to myself: "Ok, This is wierd, not the wierdest, but wierd", but by the middle of the book it was more like "Whaaaaa???"

Hmm, Wasteland of Flint was also wierd. Not as wierd as the others mentioned above, but still very good.

Oh, and since it seems that the original topic is no longer being talked about really, I feel I should post this:

http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b24/PanzerAce/Thread_Has_Been_Hijacked.jpg

Dhalgren. That book is literally insane. http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0375706682/102-1585469-9028103?v=glance&n=283155&v=glance

Anyway, to be a bit more on topic, I must say that Arnold may have unintentionaly doomed us. Our next governor will be a democrat, and that means that the gun laws can only get worse. When Arnie was running, I looked at it like this: "is he better than the competition". The answer was "yes", anything was better than the competition. I fear the next election will be, to quote south park, like voting between a "douche and a turd".

Charliegone
11-11-2005, 2:00 PM
I'm taking a political science class right now and the professor teaching sure makes me think a lot.:D I like some of her analogys and ideas, which aren't either liberal or conservative, they are very honest though, hehe. Recently we were discussing in the class about how some propositions work in California. She is not Bush lover, neither am I (thats just me), but she does believe that we certainly need to like "aggrevately baby shake" (in her own words) the legislature in California because we certainly have a spending problem.

SteveSatch
11-12-2005, 6:16 PM
Stevesach I'd have to disagree with some of your assumptions and fuzzymath.

Utah: $4,860 (lowest spending) per elementary pupil results in an education level ranking of 26th overall.

California: $7,691 (just below median spending) per elementary pupil results in an education level ranking of 46th overall.

AND I cannot understand how my son in a Californian Private School for which I pay less than $4,500 can attain the education level of 1st overall in comparison to the country... surely it would make sense to pull all the kids outta' the Cali Public Schools and put them in schools modelled after my sons school... we'd save money and get better results, right Stevesach?

Perhaps we might want to compare Ca and Utah in many ways that would influence test scores. I'm talking about involved familes, two parent families, expectations, legals and illegal immigrants who don't speak the language. You really don't understand why your kid's school has great test scores? It's because the parents who placed their kids there expect the kids to do well and support them. The test scores of similar kids in public schools are great too. It's the messed up families who don't care at all about education that nose dive the test scores.

Stevil
11-12-2005, 10:15 PM
So it has nothing to do with the progressive, dysfunctional culture created in these schools and the left-leaning teachers/bureaucrats/politicos/unions that experiment with and run them... not a wit?

PanzerAce
11-12-2005, 10:21 PM
stevil, teachers always (in my experience) tend to be left leaning compared to the community at large. bureaus, politics, and unions also, in my experience, ALWAYS will find a way to mess up schools

SteveSatch
11-13-2005, 1:58 AM
So it has nothing to do with the progressive, dysfunctional culture created in these schools and the left-leaning teachers/bureaucrats/politicos/unions that experiment with and run them... not a wit?

I've not experienced that. I've only seen a bunch of people trying to help kids.

Charliegone
11-13-2005, 2:13 AM
Here try this:

Ask people around in college (if you are) or people you know who are in college. Ask them if they had to take an assesment test which decided which class they should go in. Especially for math and english. I bet you a gagillion dollars some of those, well most of them must have taken a lower math class in order to complete the requirements for "college algebra" or "college english." How is that possible? Isn't high school suppose to prepare kids for college? It seems to me the ciriculum in schools are all f-d up. Kids aren't being taught what they are suppose to be taught. Its no wonder we are in 48th in education.

colossians323
11-13-2005, 6:57 AM
Here try this:

Ask people around in college (if you are) or people you know who are in college. Ask them if they had to take an assesment test which decided which class they should go in. Especially for math and english. I bet you a gagillion dollars some of those, well most of them must have taken a lower math class in order to complete the requirements for "college algebra" or "college english." How is that possible? Isn't high school suppose to prepare kids for college? It seems to me the ciriculum in schools are all f-d up. Kids aren't being taught what they are suppose to be taught. Its no wonder we are in 48th in education.
65% of all California fresmen have to take remedial math, and english

Stevil
11-13-2005, 12:35 PM
I've not experienced that. I've only seen a bunch of people trying to help kids.

Okay that does it, I'm callin' you on that... do you EVEN live in California?

Not saying there aren't folks trying to help kids out but come on, what school do your kids go to, you tellin' me you haven't experienced the insanity of California public schools... BS.

A bunch of Teachers backed by their Union in lockstep with a Politico Bureaucrat despite the protests of parents had the School Districts Libraries closed in favor of a music program that only benefitted a few student's... yeah, real real helpful.

BigAL
11-13-2005, 1:32 PM
I went to a pretty good public high school and did well. I felt the teachers I had were for the most part excellent and did not let their leftist leanings influence what was taught. The students who did not perform well had no one to blame but themselves. That's why I came away thinking the education system is really what you make of it.

colossians323
11-13-2005, 1:36 PM
let me tell you about my experience, with my 23 year old at Irvington High, in Fremont, Ca.
My son struggled through Jr High, and did not do his work, and ditched summer school to make up for his lack of good grades.
As his father, I was quite concerned about how well he would perform in High School, so naturally as an involved parent, I scheduled conferences with all of his teachers.
I explained to each teacher, that I needed daily reports to help my kid get his work done.
The overwhelming, or underwhelming response was that he is old enough to be responsible at this grade.
I explained to his teachers that he would lie, and tell me he finished his work, and in order to help him get it done, that I would need a daily report on what he has to complete.
I guess it was to much work for our underpaid teachers, as only his history teacher was willing to help a concerned parent with his son.
This is why I would never sacrifice my kids on the alter of the government training kamps.
He dropped out of school, no fault of any teacher, but also no concerned calls from any teachers.
He went to trade school and became a mechanic, and got his
GED, and is now joining the reserves, and excited to go to Iraq for his Country.
I also had custody of one of my nieces at this time, and at junior high, she informed me that a couple of low lifes kept offering to get her high, and were flashing a bag of marijuana at her..
I tried to talk to the principal, who had no time for me, so I spoke with the assistant principal, and she told me they don't have kids like that at their school.
How sad that the school had the "my kid wouldn't do that mentality"
I doubt that this is out of the norm since I am only one parent.
My heart goes out to those who have to send their kids to the public system.

PanzerAce
11-13-2005, 1:42 PM
yah, it had been my experience that most of the admins of a school refuse to believe that any of the kids at the school would do drugs/smoke/drink/you name it. It was actually kind of funny, once while I was in HS, a report was compiled that claimed that 20-30% of the school had smoked marijuana with in the past year. The administrators at the school got pissed off at this, enough to call a PTA meeting to tell the parents the the report was a lie. Except that a bunch of us students showed up and told the parents that the report was probally understating how many people did that stuff. IIRC, we had a bunch of new admins the next year.

SteveSatch
11-13-2005, 2:16 PM
Okay that does it, I'm callin' you on that... do you EVEN live in California?

Not saying there aren't folks trying to help kids out but come on, what school do your kids go to, you tellin' me you haven't experienced the insanity of California public schools... BS.

A bunch of Teachers backed by their Union in lockstep with a Politico Bureaucrat despite the protests of parents had the School Districts Libraries closed in favor of a music program that only benefitted a few student's... yeah, real real helpful.


My kids go to my school and my daughter was in my class last year. She did awesome on her state tests. If you don't like your local school district change it. You vote for the school board.

SteveSatch
11-13-2005, 2:18 PM
let me tell you about my experience, with my 23 year old at Irvington High, in Fremont, Ca.
My son struggled through Jr High, and did not do his work, and ditched summer school to make up for his lack of good grades.
As his father, I was quite concerned about how well he would perform in High School, so naturally as an involved parent, I scheduled conferences with all of his teachers.
I explained to each teacher, that I needed daily reports to help my kid get his work done.
The overwhelming, or underwhelming response was that he is old enough to be responsible at this grade.
I explained to his teachers that he would lie, and tell me he finished his work, and in order to help him get it done, that I would need a daily report on what he has to complete.
I guess it was to much work for our underpaid teachers, as only his history teacher was willing to help a concerned parent with his son.
This is why I would never sacrifice my kids on the alter of the government training kamps.
He dropped out of school, no fault of any teacher, but also no concerned calls from any teachers.
He went to trade school and became a mechanic, and got his
GED, and is now joining the reserves, and excited to go to Iraq for his Country.
I also had custody of one of my nieces at this time, and at junior high, she informed me that a couple of low lifes kept offering to get her high, and were flashing a bag of marijuana at her..
I tried to talk to the principal, who had no time for me, so I spoke with the assistant principal, and she told me they don't have kids like that at their school.
How sad that the school had the "my kid wouldn't do that mentality"
I doubt that this is out of the norm since I am only one parent.
My heart goes out to those who have to send their kids to the public system.

Those high school teachers have hundreds of kids to keep track of each day. You have how many kids to keep track of? You can tell your kid to show you the work? You sound like a bad parent blaming the schools. If each period a high school teacher has two students who have parents unable to do their job of keeping track of their own kids and want a daily report, that high school teacher is going to have 14 reports to write every day. When are they suppossed to do that? You have no idea how many things a teacher has to do. There's no time for writing daily reports. Maybe if only one student needed it. You didn't do your job as a parent.

6172crew
11-13-2005, 3:34 PM
Those high school teachers have hundreds of kids to keep track of each day. You have how many kids to keep track of? You can tell your kid to show you the work? You sound like a bad parent blaming the schools. If each period a high school teacher has two students who have parents unable to do their job of keeping track of their own kids and want a daily report, that high school teacher is going to have 14 reports to write every day. When are they suppossed to do that? You have no idea how many things a teacher has to do. There's no time for writing daily reports. Maybe if only one student needed it. You didn't do your job as a parent.
What a crock! "Son did you do your homework?" Yes Dad, acually we didnt have any.

And without the teacher reporting that it was turned in how would anyone know until grades are turned in. Im a military brat and have been to more schools than yo have kids. California was by far the worst in all catagories.

My aunt is a assistant teacher, my step mother a registar and both know the system sucks. My son is autistic and we have to fight to get certain things because the school doesnt want to pay.

Fact is the private systems are better and use the same amount of money, but its the teachers, unions, and over payed admins that keep us from taking our portion of funds and sending our kids to a school who performs well.

Steve what happens when your kid goes to middle school or another school where you dont have as close contact, and what happens when or if her grades drop, would you not ask the teacher for help?:rolleyes:

dadoody
11-13-2005, 3:40 PM
I went to publics school in CA until the 6th grade. Then private till college.

The public schools are a joke in CA, and I went to some of the better ones. The teachers don't know how to teach, they dish out lots of misinformation, and a lot of times have no clue what their goal is.

I remember in 4th grade public school, we spent 6 months pretending that we were Christopher Columbus' cabin boy and were to write "journals" about the experience. Could anyone here think up a more pointless task?

Went to private schools after, and they too had some morons for teachers, but there were a certain few who helped me set some kind of a path in life.

PanzerAce
11-13-2005, 3:42 PM
Yah, a bunch of my family are involved in teaching. They say that in Colorado it is a very similar system. lots of over payed dead wood. Then there are people like my cousin, who speaks 7 languages fluently (spanish, french, russian, german, lakota, english, and an African language that I dont remember), as well as another 4 that he needs a dictionary for the complicated stuff, and the 'best' that the school was willing to give him was basically a permanent 'substitute teaching position', just so they didnt have to pay him in proportion to his skills. (if they did, he would probaly be the highest paid at the school.)

colossians323
11-13-2005, 9:03 PM
Those high school teachers have hundreds of kids to keep track of each day. You have how many kids to keep track of? You can tell your kid to show you the work? You sound like a bad parent blaming the schools. If each period a high school teacher has two students who have parents unable to do their job of keeping track of their own kids and want a daily report, that high school teacher is going to have 14 reports to write every day. When are they suppossed to do that? You have no idea how many things a teacher has to do. There's no time for writing daily reports. Maybe if only one student needed it. You didn't do your job as a parent.

I guess its true what they say, if you give someone enough rope...........
At least now everyone will see your true colors.
:D

6172crew
11-13-2005, 9:30 PM
I guess its true what they say, if you give someone enough rope...........
At least now everyone will see your true colors.
:D

Im bummed out that Steve said what he said:mad: At least you would think he would give some advise as how he thinks parents can make it through the system.:confused:

colossians323
11-14-2005, 4:39 AM
Im bummed out that Steve said what he said:mad: At least you would think he would give some advise as how he thinks parents can make it through the system.:confused:
Actually you are right, that would be most helpful on this thread.

SteveSatch
11-15-2005, 12:48 AM
Im bummed out that Steve said what he said:mad: At least you would think he would give some advise as how he thinks parents can make it through the system.:confused:

I'll keep tabs on my own kids, not expect a daily report from a teacher! If my teen lies to me I'll deal with it, not pawn it off on someone else. My kids are not going to drop out of school and it they did it would be my own fault as a parent. When they reach high school I had better have instilled in them the moral fiber to not be a slacker and a liar. If they are I have failed them, not a teacher. I guess he's got to blame someone though.

SteveSatch
11-15-2005, 12:50 AM
I guess its true what they say, if you give someone enough rope...........
At least now everyone will see your true colors.
:D

Yes, my true colors are I expect a parent to be a parent. If your kid lied, slacked off, and dropped out, it is a reflection on you. You were, what, 17 when you had a kid? Interesting.

colossians323
11-15-2005, 4:58 AM
I'll keep tabs on my own kids, not expect a daily report from a teacher! If my teen lies to me I'll deal with it, not pawn it off on someone else. My kids are not going to drop out of school and it they did it would be my own fault as a parent. When they reach high school I had better have instilled in them the moral fiber to not be a slacker and a liar. If they are I have failed them, not a teacher. I guess he's got to blame someone though.
Steve,
Your arrogance reeks of dog ddo-doo
Some how I guess your kids have done nothing or will do nothing wrong. I hope one of your daughters high school teachers do not have to secretly take your daughter down to have an abortion, these words will come back to haunt you.
Its obvious you did not read the rest of the story. Or your piss poor teaching skills(unable to reason by using the facts) got in the way.
I blame no teacher for my kid going through a tough time, and being a unresponsible liar.
However, you are like most of the other teachers in the system, you pay lip service on how you care for the children, only to fail them, and the parents who are involved with their children.
Yours is the typical answer from a fat and happy union whore who is out for self gain, and would spit on the children if you could get away with it.
If a teacher truly cared, especially when the parent was involved, and making constant calls, I think they would have joy to help a student out and parent, when they see how much the parnet cares.
But you reek of mediocrity, and by your posts demonstrate how you are a big part of the problem.
If I was such a bad parent, why did my son turn out so responsible today.
I think you are right, when you say he is a reflection of my parenting, its to bad you could not be a reflection of a teacher who cares more about his students then tenure.

6172crew
11-15-2005, 5:31 AM
I'll keep tabs on my own kids, not expect a daily report from a teacher! If my teen lies to me I'll deal with it, not pawn it off on someone else. My kids are not going to drop out of school and it they did it would be my own fault as a parent. When they reach high school I had better have instilled in them the moral fiber to not be a slacker and a liar. If they are I have failed them, not a teacher. I guess he's got to blame someone though.

Typical, you work half a year educating kids and if they dont pass its the parents fault? You get paid by taxpayers money to do a job and you cant take the time to make sure the parents are aware the kid is or isnt doing well.

What would you say about a cop who failed to give anymore than 8 hours a day? Or the what if the guy paving ypour street did a ****ty job and blamed it on the fact your car leaked oil. But instead of telling you you should clean up the oil me paved right over it. Anyone getting paid my taxes should be heald to a higher standard.

Steve, It is a fact that California schools suck and everytime I hear a teacher complain about anything but not enough time in the day I know why. My cop buddy takes reports home everynight, he follows up when needed and does not get paid extra for doing so, as a Marine we worked 10 hours a day, and sometimes didnt see sleep for days. If public servants worked 8 hours a day nothing would get done, and I think the teachers unions have failed you and I by letting you believe that you can care less about the education of the kids you teach.

As an instrucor in the Marine Corps is was the responiblity of the teacher to make sure every Marine learned the material, period!

6172crew
11-15-2005, 5:46 AM
After thinking about what I said, I have to agree your kids are a direct reflection of the parents and it is up to them to spend the extra time making sure they can compete in the world.

This is not personal to anyone but the goverment is not doing the best job making sure americans can compete and my rant is directed at the system and not anyone teacher or school.

My wife graduated with honors with a BSN and her younger brother had a free ride to USC and grad with a BS in Physics- both of them will tell you it was the mom that made sure the homework was finished but when my gal started goofing off in high school it was to late for any parent to fix by the time mom found out.